Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHORSETOOTH WEST PUD - AMENDED OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN - 14-88I - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESa-ag-9V Nz � i Motion carried 5-0. Member -Strom moved to recommend the Sherman -Lawler Second Annexation and Zoning with the condition that it be placed in the neighborhood sign district. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Member Strom moved to recommend the Sherman -Lawler Third Annexation and Zoning with the condition that it be placed in the neighborhood sign district. Member Fontane seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Chair Clements mentioned that the following items for discussion will be postponed to March 7, 1994: Item 22 Waterglen PUD - Preliminary, Item 23 Waterglen - PUD Preliminary and Item 26 Proposed Amendments to the Appeals Provision of the City Code. Mr. Shepard said that he would like the Board to consider Item 19 Silver Oaks PUD, Commercial - Preliminary and Item 20 Silver Oaks PUD, Paired Housing - Preliminary, # 14-88J together with the Horsetooth West PUD, #14-88K, since they are related under the overall development plan. The Board will accept each item, however, separately. Mr. Shepard then read the staff report. Ric Hattman - Gefroh-Hattman - The overall master plan was presented with a slide presentation describing the properties and location in detail. A day care facility was relocated closer to a different intersection to keep the morning and afternoon traffic dispersed and to reduce the length of trip time to the area. The multiple family area will be directly adjacent to the school site, with 3-units to the acre for the entire parcel. The Commercial area of Taft Hill and Horsetooth with office buildings, day care center, convenience center and car wash. With generous setbacks from arterials, screened parking by buildings, and canopy functions. Features included outdoor areas near office buildings, all buildings are single -story in height, wood siding on all structures. He showed slides of a near by gas/market station and did not consider it a shopping center pointing out that it was not of their quality their project would have. He stated that points should not be withheld for the project's location. CITIZEN INPUT, Glenn Church - Dalton Street in the Springfield Housing Subdivision - How are the units going to be owned? How will these units be occupied, rentals? Mr. Hattman said it is the intention of the developers to sell the duplexes in a condominium fashion, each half to one person. It is looked at a owner -occupied situation; as in the City, there may be rentals from time to time, but it is not intended to be a rental or a project maintained by the developer to rent. Member Cottier asked Mr. Shepard with respect to the commercial area, why wouldn't it be • . ,---t--11 • • Mr. Shepard said the primary reason is that Bronson is not sufficiently separated from the intersection of Horsetooth and Taft. That distance is needed for southbound left turn stacking. To introduce a curbcut in the area would -probably--add some-unn-eoessary-colrgestinn-to—the area. Bronson Street can serve that function, placing the curbcut there the flow is freed on the arterial. Member Klataske mentioned that this project did not receive points for being an office park in a commercial area. Where does the definition for office park come from? Is there any basis for the number of buildings that would constitute an office park? Mr. Shepard said it is a definition out of the LDGS, definition section. He thought the units were calculated to promote these centers for locating in as large of a concentration of offices as possible so customers would be users on site without a lot of driving. The original calculating formula was done in 1981 and he had no background knowledge of how those numbers were arrived at in formulating them. Member Klataske also asked about the convenience center canopy lighting issue been settled? Is the developer aware of what will be permitted as far as downlighting? Mr. Shepard said there is a note on the PUD as far as the under canopy lighting being flush with the under canopy light not protruding. That the under canopy surface itself be painted in an off-white or beige or tan. With those two considerations will be a lessening of the off -site illumination that is seen in some centers. Member Klataske asked why it is preferable to have a day care center located in a commercial setting versus the location closer to the elementary school? Mr. Shepard said the day care acts as a buffer for the retail office buildings, accessible not only to residents within Silver Oaks but to anyone who is using Taft or Horsetooth, outside the square mile section. Chair Clements said the staff report states the condition concerning the operating hours of the car wash. Is it only the car wash or would it include the convenience store? Mr. Shepard said it pertains only to the car wash. Mr. Eckman said there should be three separate motions and on Item 19, he called the Board's attention to the variance to the requirement of 65% on point chart J, a variance. On page 5 there are staff findings to recommend that a one -day automatic car wash be considered allowable and of similar character, a finding as part of a motion. Member Cottier asked about finding No. 4? Mr. Shepard said the justification of the variance satisfies the neighborhood land use policies for a shopping center and that by making the finding on the variance, it satisfies the locational provision. Member Klataske moved for approval of Horsetooth Overall Development, Second Amendment. Member Strom seconded the motion.